Members of the national security establishment are concerned that some of the nominees for President-elect Donald Trump’s incoming Cabinet will be skipping the traditional FBI background checks and will be vetted by private companies instead.

But are their objections based in concern for the good of the American people or in a desire to prevent the kind of bureaucratic reform that Trump has promised?

According to CNN, the Trump transition team has cited misgivings over an FBI system they say is slow and plagued with issues that could interfere with the president-elect’s plans to speedily implement his agenda.

The FBI background checks on incoming presidential appointees have been part of a system of dating back to World War II and the early days of the Cold War.

Typically, they involve investigation a nominee’s personal history including education, employment, financial history and criminal records, although the final decisions regarding employment and security clearances are up to White House.

The incoming administration has good reason to view the FBI and U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) with skepticism after numerous examples of federal agencies being weaponized against the current administration’s political opponents.

Tulsi Gabbard who has been nominated as the Director of National Intelligence was targeted by the DOJ and placed on a terror watch list after criticizing Kamala Harris on TV.

There’s also the matter of the FBI and and intelligence community pushing Russiagate, covering up the Hunter Biden laptop, colluding with big tech to silence dissenting voices and targeting Trump and other members of his first administration.

Why should Trump’s nominees depend upon a politicized agency that has been weaponized against them to tell them whether or not they’re good enough to become part of the establishment machinery?